The latest scandal is one of Hillary's top fundraisers stating "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." In an earlier interview when asked, "Why Obama was the front-runner?" She responded by stating "...because he is black."
First of all, I am sick and tired of Clinton's campaign trying to diminish Obama's credentials. Coming from a working class family, Obama has fought his way to the top. Becoming the first Black president of the Harvard Law Review. That in itself if a testament to the type of person he is. He also was a community organizer, a professor at the U of Chicago, served on the Illinois legislature for seven years, and finally won a seat in the Senate. So do not try to trick me into thinking that he is not ready.
Check out these presidential stats:
Theodore Roosevelt : New York’s governor for two years and William McKinley’s Vice President for a few months before becoming president
Woodrow Wilson: New Jersey’s governor for two years before being elected president.
Franklin D. Roosevelt: The only president to serve for four terms was New York’s governor for four years.
None of them served in the Senate. The experience issue is a non-issue. It is just another tactic from the Clinton campaign book to dupe gullible Americans into not voting for someone who is not only qualified, but has the character and integrity to propel this country to the next level.
Statistically speaking, he is not supposed to be where he is now. Coming from a small-town in Kansas, he fought his way to the top. How dare anyone question whether or not he has the drive or qualifications to be where he is? He has worked hard to fulfill his American Dream. He is no different than any other college student from a low-income family who beats the odds and makes it out on top.
Additionally, is this how far we have come? Is this what the presidential nomination race has turned into? Do candidates have to spread lies, create controversy, and tear apart the very nation they are supposedly trying to bring together? I've followed the race faithfully and I can honestly say that Hillary Clinton's campaign is divisive.
Hillary Clinton knows that the only way she can win is through divisive means. She wants Blacks to vote for Obama and Latinos to vote for her. She wants the wealthy to vote for Obama and the working class to vote for her. She wants Blacks to vote for Obama and Whites to vote for her. She feeds off of the drama and divisiveness that plagues our country. She feeds off of the drama, the fear-mongering, and controversy because she knows that is how she will win.
She wants the media to focus on the amount of Blacks voting for Obama instead of the amount of Whites voting for her and who will refuse to vote for Obama because he is Black. Blacks are not voting for Hillary based off her race or gender, they are not voting for her because they believe in the policies of Obama and what his campaign stands for.
I could go on, but I really want you all to comment on this. I just had to vent a little (well maybe a lot).
5 comments:
Well the reality of the matter is that 1) Obama and Clinton are both politicians, and politicians have a habit of mudslinging in order to get votes. Thats is the fallacy of politics in this country, because people vote for a candidate based on their characteristics instead of how they stand on issues, or how they have voted on them in the past.
No I don't particularly care for Hillary but I'd be fooling myself to think that Clinton and Obama are that different from one another. The reality is, they are both more similar than they are different.
The second thing that bothers me is the fact that Americans seem to forget that Obama and Clinton are in the same party, and the reality is that they might just end up running mates. That's why I don't understand why people are so divided between the two and badmouth supporters of the other candidate.
The last time I checked though, it is the nature of American politics to be divisive so it is understandable.
The last thing I have to say is that even if Hillary Clinton keeps playing dirty politics, I'm still not gonna vote for her...That is not to say that I'm going to vote for Obama because his message doesn't correlate to the way he's voted in congress in the past. Furthermore they're both democrats, and I've come to the realization that democrats(for lack of a better term) are wimps. They are no better than Republicans, but the difference is that republicans will tell you what crap they're gonna pull when they get into office. Democrats lie and lead on people with false promises of actually doing something worthwile for this country, and I'd really like it if people woke up and realized this. I would tell people to vote independent but then I'd be labeled as trying to influence opinion, or better yet those who claim to be democrats would say that an independent vote is a 'wasted vote' (I'd get a good laugh from that one). Then they'd probably proceed to give me the whole jargon about how the system in this country was designed to be a two party system. Yes, I can agree with the way the system was created, but who's to say we have to abide by the way a system was created??
Honestly,
I feel that it should be the responsibility of Senator Clinton to hold her supporters accountable for their words and/or actions. When the Republican gentleman made his comments on his radio show by stating Senator Obama's entire name as a way of insulting Senator Obama's character, Senator McCain immediately refuted his comments and made it clear that they were in no way indicative of the standpoint and views of the McCain campaign. Senator Clinton is doing herself a disservice by remaining silent on this matter.
My comment is kinda long....Sorry! LOL
Your blog is so on point. I am absolutely outraged by Senator Clinton's disgraceful campaigning tactics and cannot believe that the DNC has not stepped in to reprimand her.
It amazes me that she feels as if she is entitled to be President because she lived in the White House for 8 years, so she MUST be experienced. If that's the case, I should be entitled to being Chief Operating Officer of the company that I currently work for right? After all, my dad was the former COO and I lived with him while he held that position. It's only fair that I transition into his position since he is now retired. Give me a break! LOL! How in the world can this woman run on the platform of experience without providing any evidence of this so-called experience?
I have to say that Geraldine Ferraro is 100% correct. She is absolutely right by saying that Barack is only in this position because he is Black. Why? Because in reality, if he was white, he would have been the Democratic nominee a LONG time ago.
Think about it...America wouldn't have to think twice about voting for a white man from a working class family who strived for and achieved academic excellence at the country's most prestigious universities. They would salute him for turning down a 6-figure salary to work to organize an inner-city community for a salary well below minimum wage. They would applaud him for being a civil rights lawyer, who understands the value of equal rights for all. They would honor him for his 20+ years of service to the community and people as a whole.
It's a low down dirty shame how Senator Clinton continues to spew her racism. She's tried her best to hide it, but it becomes more and more obvious over time. I'm surprised she hasn't referred to Obama as "boy", since that's basically how she looks at him. She dismisses his experience and credentials to a simple speech and mocks his ability to motivate others. She insults him and tries to manipulate voters by saying that he could be her running mate because even though he's number 1, she still sees him as inferior. She also made it clear that although MLK did all of the marching and the organizing for civil rights, it took the white president to really make it happen. Even though she claims to admire and support MLK, she did not support him or believe in civil rights because that was during her phase as a Goldwater Girl and a Republican.
She is now trying to run a fear, white power-based campaign by letting white America know that they need to protect themselves from this dangerous Black man who just might be Muslim. He'll come and ruin your privileged white homes and disturb your privileged white ways of life. After all, he's attacking white women (Me, Geraldine Ferraro, and the little white girl in my commercial) and you can't let this Black boy get away with that.
A lot of people say that Hilary and Obama are the same, but I disagree. Their political agendas, positions on health care, and such might be similar, but their character sets them worlds apart. Senator Clinton, in my opinion, lacks integrity and is a bully. I wouldn’t be surprised if the nomination is handed to her because she’s going to do whatever it takes to blackmail and/or bribe other politicians/super delegates to sway things in her favor. It’s the American way…See George Bush! The nerve of that Obama guy to have so much integrity. Maybe everyone is right to question his experience because, after all, he definitely doesn’t have quite enough experience in the scandal and manipulation arenas as most politicians like McCain and Clinton. LOL
And that's my five cents.
Ferraro is a moron. Obama's color has always seemed to be his main weakness now all of a sudden he is where he is now (in the lead) because of it? Get the hell out of here!
I understand everyone's sentiments, but politically, this is some really weak stuff. People keep talking about Clinton's kitchen sink strategy, but Obama hasn't seen anything yet. I like the way he's handled himself so far, but even he has to know is peanuts compared to what the far right will throw at him during the general election. This is just politics and it's all fair game.
RE: Ferraro, she was just sticking up for her girl. Yeah, the comments were out of line, but she's still done what she wanted to do. Right now, we're focusing so much of our energy talking about who said what and we're not talking about the issues. Quitely, Obama's general election poll lead over McCain has slipped 5 pts.
Moreover, we're not talking about how he's has narrowed the superdelegate gap by about 70 delegates, we're not talking about a 20+ pt beatdown in Mississippi. We're letting the media define Pennsylvania as the last push, and not recognizing that he's narrowed that gap to less than 5 pts. We're also not talking about how North Carolina is almost as large a state as Pennsylvania and how he has a 11-13 pt lead there. A lot of good things are going on and he's doing really well. This is pretty much his primary to lose. Forget about the bull and focus on the real.
Post a Comment